"3MP" Showdown
 

"Mark B." wrote:

Sigma doesn't dominate *any* market.

They dominate the market for cameras and lenses that use the Sigma lens
mount. grin

--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

"3MP" Showdown
 

In article , George
Preddy wrote:

Sandy, in terms of quality Sigma is dominant right now, no other pro
DSLR is even close. Certainly not the ancient 1Ds, with its barebones
electronic side, small sensor pitch, and blurry old 90's vintage 0.35
micron CMOS. Certainly not the moire-machine 14n. Not only is Sigma
dominant, there's literally no competition in the pro class.

Sigma is outclassing medium format film, no one else is halfway to
35mm in full color performance.

The only thing dominant about Sigma is their ability to produce
mediocre equipment which create mediocre images.

"3MP" Showdown
 

Mark Roberts wrote in news:y7kGc.23358$MT5.2373
@nwrdny01.gnilink.net:

Sigma doesn't dominate *any* market.

They dominate the market for cameras and lenses that use the Sigma lens
mount. grin


They also dominate the market using Foveon sensors.


/Roland

"3MP" Showdown
 

Leonard wrote:

http://www.pbase.com/image/30968764/original

correction:

http://www.pbase.com/image/31010266/original

I redid the rotation and crop down to 3MP with jpegtran (lossless) so as
to show more closely the actual camera output. The main difference is the
file size is quite a bit smaller.

- Len

"3MP" Showdown
 

Leonard writes:

The picture of the SD9 contains a useful illustration of why blur
filters should be used even when sampling with full colour at each
location.

An antialiasing filter shouldn't be called a "blur filter" because it
doesn't simply blur the image. The ones made from birefringent material
create a controlled multiple image that eliminates information at the
Nyquist frequency while maintaining good contrast up to about 70% of
that limit. A filter that simply blurred a point into a round disc
or a Gaussian shape would lose much more image information below the
Nyquist limit if it was sized to produce reasonable attenuation at the
Nyquist frequency. In filtering terms, the anti-aliasing filter
provides a sharper cutoff than any simply blurring filter.

Foveon's technical reports call an antialiasing filter a "blur filter"
because they don't want to understand the difference, and don't
acknowledge that avoiding aliasing is a good thing. "George" calls it
that too, probably for the same reason. And you *can* use blur to
provide anti-aliasing, it just isn't what cameras with AA filters do.

Dave

"3MP" Showdown
 

"George Preddy" wrote in message
om...
3MP Bayer image (0.75 Foveon MPs)
http://www.pbase.com/image/30338213/original


Only a moron (if the shoe fits, Preddy...) would try to pass this off as a
typical 3MP bayer image. My 3 year-old Oly C-3040 takes incredible
pictures. This one looks like it was taken at about ASA/ISO 1600 with very,
very little light and a super-long exposure.

Foveon is interesting technology but it's low light performance leaves much
to be desired, which is only one reason why www.dpreview.com could only give
either Sigma DSLR a "Recommended" rating instead of the coveted "Highly
Recommended" like the D70, Digital Rebel, and Pentax *ist D all received
(and even the Oly 8080, the successor to my C-3040).